2 comments:

In response to a note at talkleft.com I do find her 'shrill' and also very close to the edge.

On paper and if she doesn't speak, it's a spectacularly good choice. But when she speaks -- her voice an octave higher than it would naturally be, the tension behind it, and the frown she does after each 'paragraph' -- just scared me.

I was hoping that if Dems had to lose, that we'd at least have that 'historic' thing on the other side and I give McCain credit for the bold move.

While I'd think this will actually hurt McCain, as people hear her more, we DID see, voted in, George W. Bush twice! Not to mention Cheney. So some are probably right that she may get more voters than I'd think from what I saw.

I don't know. I'm not really for Obama due to the gap between how he presents himself and how he functioned in the primary but this may cause me to vote for him after all because the stresses with global problems require someone a bit cooler in style.

On the other hand, she seems to have integrity. The wikipedia entry for her says this======="While the previous administration did not implement same-sex benefits, Palin complied with an Alaskan state Supreme Court order and signed them into law.[32] She disagreed with the Supreme Court ruling[33] and supported a democratic advisory vote from the public on whether there should be a constitutional amendment on the matter.[34] Alaska was one of the first U.S. states to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage, in 1998, along with Hawaii.[35] Palin has stated that she supported the 1998 constitutional amendment.[10]

Palin's first veto was used to block legislation that would have barred the state from granting benefits to the partners of gay state employees. In effect, her veto granted State of Alaska benefits to same-sex couples. The veto occurred after Palin consulted with Alaska's attorney general on the constitutionality of the legislation.[33]"========